We are in a recession, so people are focused on immigrants. I used to hear about H1-B visa workers in Silicon Valley taking away good programming jobs from citizens, and depressing the wages of coders.
On TV this morning in my hotel room, I listened while the Republican talking head mentioned anchor babies and wealth birth tourists. Anchor babies is around 300,000 per year according to most Googled guestimates. Whether you consider that to be a risk or a problem is another question. Whether it is enough of a problem to amend the US Constitution - not by my standards.
Birth tourism is when the Hong Kong folks came to the US to give birth. My son’s school has a fair number of kids born in the US to foreign parents. However, these are kids from money, their parents buy nice houses, and they are sticking around. I don’t see them as a threat - they are a benefit. We are cash positive from these people.
No, I didn’t get that from a link. I got that from the US-VISIT people. They work right ::turn around:: there.
When I read your posts, I can’t help but imagine tears streaming down your face. I don’t know how you have the time to imagine all sorts of persecutions going on in the world. First its “Women are so oppressed” and now it’s “we only deport the brown people”. Both statements are utterly retarded. The world would be a better place if you just shut the fuck up.
No. But My post was not intended to read into that quote, but to the tone of all the posts up to that point. It’s true that the first post I chose to illustrate the trend appeared later, but it certainly proved the point.
Or… are you contending that no one, until DianaG, was ascribing racism or evil to the Republicans?
I’ve long held out the hope that Bricker doesn’t believe all his own arguments, but is simply playing a Devil’s Advocate, defending the indefensible. He is a lawyer after all, that’s what they do for a living: argue stuff, even if they don’t neccesarily agree with it.
I wouldn’t want to hijack such a well-directed thread as this one, but…how many/which other countries have this?
In response to the OP: I’m no racist, but why not review a 145 year-old law? It served a purpose when Tom Sawyer was relevant, our flag only had 37 stars, our map had 50% of its area, and automobiles, machine guns, HP Lovecraft and interstate highways had not yet darkened our landscape. Perhaps our role in international politics and our socioeconomic profile has changed just a bit since the time when this seemed like a good idea.
And yes, that means why not review portions of that document that are nearly a century older still? I can’t speak with any degree of certainty, but I have to wonder if The Founding Fathers ever truly believed their work would have endured this long.
I used the word “Xenophobia”. A distinct concept from racism, although I admit there is a fair amount of overlap between the two terms. Must I draw a Venn Diagram for you?
Are you talking about the real America, which has taken in hundreds of millions of immigrants from every corner of the globe, far more than any country in human history, and continues to take in hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants a year?
Or are you talking about AmeriKKKa™, the evil empire that invaded Iraq so Halliburton’s private army could rape a peasant girl and then harvest her heart for Dick Cheney?
A willingness to exploit the racism of others is not proof of racism, only a breathtaking moral bankruptcy. Good point, Bricker, a fine distinction indeed.
Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t think of any reason to repeal the 14th Amendment that can’t be boiled down to Xenophobia, of which, as has been pointed out, there is a certain intersection with racism. But in this particular case xenophobia is a better descriptor than racism.